Should nations repent?

By Kevin Baker

A recent issue of USA Today (Feb. 28) announced: "Legislators to push for U.S. apology for slavery." The article notes that there is a push for the nation to follow the lead of five states in the union that did something over the past 12 months never done previously: "expressed regret or apologized for slavery."

The U.S. has never issued an apology for the heinous evil of slavery, although the nation did officially apologize for Executive Order 9066, which placed Japanese-Americans in interment camps during WW II, and, in 1993, to native Hawaiians for over-throwing their kingdom in 1895. As for Native Americans, a more-than-belated apology came just a few days ago.

Although I admit there’s an important difference between "repentance" and "apology," an apology that comes with hat-in-hand humility is an important first step. An apology is a beginning, especially to disciples of Jesus, who are called upon to practice difficult things like forgiveness.

Many, like Roger Clegg of the Center for Equal Opportunity, disagree:

An apology is counterproductive, it taps into white guilt and helps perpetuate social programs the civil rights establishment likes, such as racial preferences and ultimately reparations. . . .[an apology serves] no legitimate purpose since the villains and victims are long since deceased. . . .[this would only serve to] keep racial wounds alive.

Such logic may work well in some circles, but it shouldn't carry much weight with Christians. United Methodist Bishop Kenneth Carder shares a story about how he explained vicarious sin (and salvation) to a church member who didn't understand that he could be complicit in evils such as racism and sexism.

Bishop Carder asked the man: "Are you responsible for Jesus’ death? Surely you don't think you had anything to do with crucifying Jesus, do you?" The man paused. "Well, yes, actually, in a way I did crucify Jesus because of my sin." "Then," replied the bishop, "you understand vicarious sin."

What about nations? Should nations apologize?

Kevin Baker is pastor of Reconciliation United Methodist Church in Durham, North Carolina.

Comments

[johnhamilton]

My heart wants to say, yes. A free-standing apology without genuine repentance, however, may produce the result opposite that which is desired. How about an apology + commitment to end contemporary slavery or national day of mourning + major endowment for Native American colleges and cultural centers? Zacchaeus gave fourfold to express repentance. Can one of the wealthiest nations in history be asked to do less? Why not put teeth into the apology?

[rick brand]

Friends and I have asked that the United States apologize to the United Nations for lying to them about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

[Rhology]

The prophet Daniel certainly repented on behalf of his whole nation, a couple of times, in Daniel. Other OT prophets did the same.
Why shouldn't nations apologise?

And if the US is to apologise to the UN, could the UN also apologise for wasting vast amounts of its dues money, bribing countless officials in Oil-for-Food, ignoring and enabling sexual assaults on refugee camps in Rwanda and Congo, and doing virtually nothing in Darfur? And for its shameful actions in Serbia? Blame goes everywhere, rick brand.

Peace,
Rhology

[d. stephen long]

Hans urs von Balthasar suggested that modern nation states cannot be "actors" in the divine drama. They are not "persons" in the theological sense. I think this is right. While some recognition of a nation's wrongdoing seems important, the fear I would have is that this makes the "nation-state" a moral person, perhaps akin to the fictive notion of the corporation as a "person?" That couldn't be good. So how can you get a nation-state to make such a confession without reifying it as such a moral person that then has a substantive role in the divine economy?

[rick brand]

The first reaction to Rhology was why not? Confession is good for everybody, but then Stephen told us that it was not theologically appropriate for nations to act like people and so I guess that the simple answer to the question of this article is No.

[Jason Byassee]

Steve thanks for that from Balthasar, you put your finger on what was bugging me about this suggestion. My political instincts on this say yes, if any nation has plenty to repent for it's ours, but then repentance is the flip side of sanctification, and we wouldn't want to say a nation-state can or should be a Christian thing. Maybe we could use the lesser language of apology then, as Kevin Baker does here?

[Sarah S. Howell]

Niemoller called for corporate confession and repentance in the wake of the Holocaust on the part of Christians who stood by while Jews perished--even from the Confessing Church Movement. The idea of collective responsibility, however, may be more applicable (or coherent) in the context of the body of Christ than in the framework of a nation-state.

[Rhology]

They are not "persons" in the theological sense.

They are in the biblical sense - see those passages to which I referred.

[d. stephen long]

Sarah,

You may have a point, but I intentionally referred to the "nation-state" rather than "nation" or the "ethne" we find in Holy Scripture. The latter clearly has a role in the divine economy as the final image in the Book of Revelation shows. The nations bring their goodness to the city of God. A question for me is if the USA is a "nation" or a "nation-state." I think it is the latter. For a discussion of the difference see Anthony Marx's Faith in Nation.

[Kevin Baker]

Steve,

Good to hear from you! (if only virtually). And thanks for the book recommendation ... I will be ordering it. I am especially interested in discovering Marx's distinction between nation and nation-state (I am familiar with others, but not his).

I am still curious if you think apology, not repentance, is warranted in cases like these. Here are two excerpts from the PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR JUSTICE AND PEACE's "CONTRIBUTION TO WORLD CONFERENCE
AGAINST RACISM, RACIAL DISCRIMINATION,
XENOPHOBIA AND RELATED INTOLERANCE"
(Durban, 31 August - 7 September 2001):

-----------snip----------
The request for pardon concerns the life of the Church first of all. It is still legitimate however to "hope that political leaders and peoples, especially those involved in tragic conflicts, fuelled by hatred and the memory of often ancient wounds, will be guided by the spirit of forgiveness and reconciliation exemplified by the Church and will make every effort to resolve their differences through open and honest dialogue" (John Paul II, Address to the participants in the International Symposium on the Inquisition [31 October 1998], 5: L'Osservatore Romano English edition, 11 November 1998, p. 3).

It also contains this interesting piece on reparations (and apology), that I remember discussing with you years ago.

-------snip------------
From the legal point of view, all persons (individual or corporate) have a right to equitable reparation if personally and directly they have suffered injury (material or moral). The duty to make reparation must be fulfilled in an appropriate way. As far as possible, reparation should erase all the consequences of the illicit action and restore things to the way they would most probably be if that action had not occurred. When such a restoration is not possible, reparation should be made through compensation (equivalent reparation). This is the most common form of reparation, but the calculation of the compensation is often difficult. When compensation does not suffice to make reparation for a moral injury, moral reparation can be made, that is satisfaction. An example of this is the offering of an apology or expression of regret to the victim State by the State responsible for the wrong.

The full document can be found here
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20010829_comunicato-razzismo_en.html

[Charles Kiker]

This does not bear directly on the question of whether nations should repent, but the sheep/goats passage in Mt. 25 comes to mind. In the parable, the Lord gathers all the nations (ethne) before him, and divides them on his right and left. I don't think ethne/ethnoi refers to nations, in the sense of nation states. Neither do I think one can differentiate between nation and nation-state as easily as Rhology does. In the case of the at least quasi-democratic United States, the nation-state reflects to some degree the will of the ethne/nation-people.

Another interesting thought regarding Mt. 25: Jesus was probably talking about the goyim when he referred to the ethne. Some of the goyim, he may have been saying, unknowingly ministered to the Lord when they treated the least of these with kindness.

But back to the question, "Should nations repent?" I think yes. The nation-state of the USA probably cannot, but the nation-people can, should, and must.

I hope the Jeremiah Wright/Barack Obama uproar calls us to repentance, as a nation-people. Unfortunately, we seem to be more willing to throw the contemporary Jeremiah down a well, like the nation-state Judah did to the seventh century BCE prophet whose name the Rev. Wright bears.

[Charles Kiker]

My apologies to Rhology. I confused his post with Stephen Long's.

[Danielle Reid]

Thanks johnhamilton for your comment. I like your idea that the "apology" would be more effective if accompanied by a national day of mourning to acknowledge the failure of our nation to realize its own ideals-even to this day. Maybe our national leaders could begin our national observances of Independence Day or Memorial Day with addressing where we are and were we intend to go as a nation. Like Roger Clegg, I believe that having this generation apologize for sins that originated with our ancestors can do more harm than good. However, we can all apologize for perpetuating the same problems within our own generation. We are reaping what they have sown, and then sowing some of the same seeds for others to reap later. We need to decide what seeds we really want to sow, more of the same or more of what will produce better fruit for our generations to come?